Search is becoming more than a way to find a link: it is part of a struggle over digital infrastructure and user habits. Google is simultaneously strengthening its AI tools, competing with ChatGPT for search queries, and changing the interfaces of familiar apps. These developments show that the question is no longer just which system answers a query more accurately, but who controls access to information, how the user experience is shaped, and what role advertising and commercial interests play.
The most visible conflict has emerged around schools. Google announced that Gemini, Gemini Notebook, Gemini in Classroom, and Google Search will be turned off by default for K–12 student accounts—that is, for students up to the end of high school. School administrators will be able to enable one, two, or all three services individually. However, according to Chris Phillips, Google’s vice president of education products, schools that ban AI altogether will also lose access to Search: students will see a message from their school saying it is unavailable. CBS News reports.
Google says the change is intended to give schools control over the digital tools used in the classroom. But linking access to Search to permission to use AI has raised suspicions that the company is using its dominant position to push educational institutions toward adopting its products. New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani called it an attempt to “use monopoly power to force AI into our public schools.” Former U.S. Federal Trade Commission chair Lina Khan also said the decision illustrates the risks that arise when a dominant company controls an essential service. Child advocacy group Fairplay said the pressure could backfire and deepen distrust of Google’s products.
The dispute is especially contentious because Google already has a widespread presence in education: the company says Google Classroom has about 150 million student and teacher users, and students are often given Chromebooks. After Gemini became available to many younger students in August, New York announced a one-year delay in the use of generative AI for children from pre-K through eighth grade. For schools, choosing AI is not just a matter of convenience, but also of safety, privacy, age appropriateness, and its impact on learning. American Federation of Teachers President Randi Weingarten criticized Google, saying the company was putting business interests ahead of collaboration with teachers and parents.
The broader shift is also evident amid this conflict: the very idea of search is expanding. ChatGPT is now vying not just to be a conversation partner, but also a search engine. According to figures cited by Adam Fry, head of consumer product at ChatGPT, ChatGPT’s search query volume has reached about 20% of Google’s. The Verge reports. Fry clarified that OpenAI counts a query as a search when it triggers a web request, rather than a simple question such as a request to explain a term. He did not disclose the source of the estimate for Google’s volume, however, so it should be treated as a company claim rather than an independently verified market share.
One-fifth is a significant signal, but it does not mean ChatGPT is already close to replacing Google. For comparison, Microsoft estimated Bing’s share of the search market at around 3% in 2023, after years of competition. ChatGPT may also rely on Bing and its own search index, and the precise breakdown of sources remains unclear. Even so, user habits are changing: instead of a list of links, people increasingly receive a synthesized answer that may include explanations, visualizations, and interactive elements. OpenAI calls this direction an “intelligent interface”—presenting information not just as text, but as an interactive workspace within a chat.
This shift calls the familiar economics of web search into question. Google and OpenAI are looking for ways to make money from new formats, including through advertising. OpenAI has already begun showing images of advertised products and services, rather than just a company name, logo, and link. Fry says advertising has not yet prompted a sustained negative response from users. But the commercial model for chat-based search will depend on whether companies can distinguish helpful recommendations from paid promotion and maintain trust in their answers. In conventional search results, users see a set of links and can assess the sources; in a chatbot’s answer, advertising or hidden ranking may be less obvious.
At the same time, Google is changing not only search technology but also the everyday interfaces of its apps. Google is testing a redesign of pinned conversations and the placement of Search on the main screen in Google Messages, 9to5Google reports. Pinned contacts may move from the top of the list to a separate, larger area with photos, while Search could become a floating button next to the compose button. This is a small change compared with the fight over school access to Search or ChatGPT’s market share, but it reflects the same logic: interfaces should make key features visible, quick, and accessible, while user experience itself becomes a competitive battleground.
This redesign involves a trade-off. Larger photos make it easier to jump to important contacts, but push other conversations down and, unlike the familiar list, do not show conversation history or details of the latest message. A floating Search button, by contrast, could make the app easier to use one-handed. It is still a test version, and it is not yet clear whether it will reach all users or retain a separate Gemini button.
Taken together, these three stories show that Google and its competitors are fighting not over a single feature, but for control of the gateways to digital life. In a school, that gateway might be the search bar on a student’s device; in ChatGPT, the chat window, which is becoming an alternative to search results; in a messaging app, the placement of buttons and pinned contacts. The more deeply these services are woven into everyday routines, the greater their owners’ influence over how people learn, choose products, and communicate.
The central tension is that convenience and control can move in opposite directions. Integrated AI tools can save time and make tasks easier, but decisions about access, settings, and monetization are made by the platform. For schools, this means evaluating not only the quality of AI, but also the terms of access to basic services. For users, it means distinguishing answers grounded in sources from recommendations shaped by commercial interests. For regulators, the question is where product improvement ends and the use of a dominant position to impose bundled services begins.
In this context, “search” is no longer just a technology for matching queries with web pages. It is simultaneously infrastructure for accessing information, an interface for interacting with AI, and a source of revenue. That is why Google’s decision to link school access to Search with AI settings has caused such a stir, and why OpenAI’s claims about ChatGPT’s growth—and even changes to buttons in Google Messages—share a common significance: technology companies are striving to occupy a central place in users’ habits. The outcome of this competition will be determined not only by the accuracy of answers, but also by trust, transparency around commercial incentives, and the genuine ability of schools and users to choose alternatives.
